Schizo borders

Ferdinand Marcos’ remains shouldn’t be interred in Libingan ng mga Bayani,  Vice President Jejomar Binay wrote. For “service as a soldier,” Marcos could be accorded military honors—within Ilocos Norte.

“Solomonic,” gushed Binay’s apple polishers. Or is this just political  schizophrenia?

This controversy has rankled since 1993. After People Power exile,  Marcos’ embalmed corpse has been displayed in a Batac mausoleum. “It is ringed by fuchsia, bougainvillea, white sampaguita,” Viewpoint noted. “There are no yellow flowers.”

Then 216 congressmen lofted House Resolution 1135. Allow Marcos’ burial in  the 142-hectare cemetery, it asks President Benigno Aquino III.

“As longest serving president, Ferdinand Marcos built the modern foundations of the Philippines,” author Rep. Salvador Escudero  asserts. “He remained a Filipino patriot to the end of his life and in death deserves to be honored as such.”

What country cites longevity as a dictator as basis for honors? Onli in da Pilipins. Marcos reserved a  tomb  for himself  among heroes, AFP’s Grave Service Unit website shows. But Edsa One intervened.

Libingan graves for Sen. Benigno Aquino and  herself apparently never  crossed Corazon Aquino’s mind. Without ifs and buts, she rejected  Libingan  burial for Marcos. Was she made of sterner stuff than her son?

The President, meanwhile,  tossed the issue to  Binay. “People will say I’m biased,” P-Noy  explained. Binay cobbled an Ilocos-Norte escape hatch based on opinion-sounding. “It is well balanced and considers all views,” he tells anybody within earshot.

The  buck is back on the President’s desk. A wishbone won’t do for a backbone. No more dodges now.

“(That) seems a reasonable compromise,”  Sen. Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. told  Inquirer. “We just like to bury our father in a way that he deserved.”

That “reasonableness” drapes the first public, albeit indirect, acknowledgment by the Marcoses that their 18-year-campaign to inter the  strongman in Libingan may be dead in water. Resistance to HR 1135 persists.

The congressmen’s claim that (Marcos) built the modern foundations of the Philippines is “historical revisionism at its deceitful worst,”  Makati Business Club recently declared. His “true legacy consisted of autocracy, ruined democratic institutions, violent political repression, unprecedented wholesale corruption, shameless nepotism, crony capitalism, a crushing debt burden and widespread social inequity and marginalization.”

“We don’t want to preempt the President,” Malacañang deputy spokesperson Abigail Valte told chaffing journalists: “It’s not as simple as it seems. There are not just historical issues but there are issues also on protocol.”

“Anyone who considers protocol unimportant never dealt with a cat,” an old saw goes. Still, protocol ranks low in a controversy that sweeps in more fundamental values like justice and accountability.

These values anchor a democratic society. In an Inquirer op-ed article  “Marcos and Social Memory,” Rex Lores of Philippine Futuristics Studies underscored this point.

Chile’s Gen. Augusto Pinochet, France’s justice minister Pierre Laval and Marshall Philippe Petain, along with  Korean presidents Chun Doo-Hwan and Roh Tae Woo occupied their country’s highest posts—as Marcos did here. Yet they were sanctioned for corruption and betrayal of public trust, Lores recalls.

Chile refused to allow burial of Pinochet’s ashes in military grounds. Laval was executed by firing squad. Old age (89) saved Petain from his death sentence. Chun and Roh were imprisoned.

May we tack on a short footnote? In 1961, the embalmed body (like Marcos) of Josef Stalin vanished from display at Red Square’s sarcophagus (like Batac’s mausoleum). Premier Nikita Khrushchev earlier denounced Stalin for purges that led to the death of millions, as is happening now with our homegrown strongman.

Weeks later, a new grave appeared in inner Kremlin walls with a granite stone marker: “J. V. Stalin  1879-1953.” Only this year did Moscow acknowledge the Katyn forest masscare. Over 23,000 Polish officers were killed there on Stalin’s orders

History exposes the sham of HR 1135. “The attempt to revise history and count Marcos among our fallen heroes is an assault on our memory,” Lores says.

Do we Filipinos prefer to forget? The 1999 Ateneo-Wisconsin University conference on legacies of the Marcos dictatorship: “Memory, Truth-Telling  and the Pursuit of Justice” asked that question.

“In this country, everything seems infinitely negotiable,” noted Ateneo’s  Alfredo A. R. Bengzon. “The truth frequently becomes whatever pleases the powers that be. It is young people who can confirm that our memory of dictatorship can not be erased.”

Try this task in the context of “schizo borders.”

Most of Marcos’ 27 medals were bogus, New York Times revealed in a series based on U.S. National Archives. U.S. Army records state that no “unit, designating itself as Maharlika, ever existed as a guerrilla force.” Will  these medals and Maharlika turn real, within “schizo borders” of Currimao, Sarrat or San Nicolas towns?

The Supreme Court ruled on July 15, 2003 that Marcoses massively  embezzled public funds. The Swiss government returned $823 million to PCGG. Will Paoay and Batac towns rule the Court wrong within “schizo borders?” Will Bangui or Nueva Era towns prod PCGG: Return the loot to Geneva?

That’d mix up the real with the phony. Bizzare acts follow from a  screw-up. Shrinks call this schizophrenia. Is that what a “Solomonic”  solution prescribes?